descrybe logo
You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee, United States of America, Intervenor-Appellant v. McImetro Access Transmission Services, Inc. Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee, Georgia Public Service Commission, Robert B. Baker, Jr., in His Official Capacity as Chairman, Lauren "Bubba" McDonald in His Official Capacity as Commissioner, Robert Durden, in His Official Capacity as Commissioner, Stancil O. Wise, in His Official Capacity as Commissioner, Defendants-Appellees-Cross-Appellants. Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee, United States of America, Intervenor-Appellant v. Worldcom Technologies, Inc., a Successor in Interest to Mfs Intelenet of Georgia, Inc., Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee, E. Spire Communications, Inc., Formerly Known as American Communications Services, Inc., Nextlink Georgia, Inc., Teleport Communications Atlanta, Inc., Georgia Public Service Commission, Robert B. Baker, Jr., in His Offic

Citations: 297 F.3d 1276; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 14430Docket: 00-12809

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit; July 17, 2002; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. initiating legal proceedings against MCIMetro Access Transmission Services, Inc., along with other telecommunications companies and commissioners of the Georgia Public Service Commission, over telecommunications-related disputes. The United States of America intervened as an appellant. The appeals, numbered 00-12809 and 00-12810, originated from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia under Judge J. Owen Forrester and involved similar issues with companies like Worldcom Technologies, Inc. and ICG Telecom Group, Inc. On July 17, 2002, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted a petition for rehearing en banc, vacating the previous panel's opinion and allowing the full court to reexamine the case. This procedural move underscores the significance of the dispute, with Judges Joel F. Dubina and Frank M. Hull recusing themselves from the rehearing. The en banc review could potentially lead to a change in the legal framework governing telecommunications disputes addressed in this case.

Legal Issues Addressed

Recusal of Judges

Application: Judges Joel F. Dubina and Frank M. Hull recused themselves from the en banc rehearing, which reflects the procedural norms for managing potential conflicts of interest or impartiality concerns.

Reasoning: Judges Joel F. Dubina and Frank M. Hull recused themselves from participation in the rehearing.

Rehearing En Banc

Application: The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted a rehearing en banc, illustrating the court's decision to reevaluate the case by the full bench due to its significance.

Reasoning: On July 17, 2002, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted a petition for rehearing en banc, indicating that a majority of active judges in the court favored this course of action.

Vacatur of Previous Panel Opinion

Application: The court vacated the previous panel's opinion, indicating the opinion is nullified pending the full court's review, which may lead to a different outcome.

Reasoning: Consequently, the previous panel's opinion was vacated, leading to a fresh examination of the cases by the full court.